Londonistan, Eurabia

[Keith&Co.]

to appease moslems is selling halal meat and not labelling it as such.

Why would Muslims count it as 'appeasement' if the meat is secretly halal? If they have that much power to force stores to go halal, then wouldn't they want the infidels to know how much power the Muslims have?
That'd be like a terrorist attack where you make it look like an airplane had structure failure, then don't take any credit for the crash....
What's the point?

 

[RavenSky]

So you are equally outraged by every restaurant with a focused menu? You are outraged by restaurants that serve only Greek food or only Chinese food too?

No one "dictated" to anyone what to eat or how to eat it. The Subway in question is catering to a niche market just as every ethic/specialized restaurant does, but that in no way restricts you from also eating Greek, Chinese or Halal if you want.

I'm "outraged" when religion starts to dictate what I can and can't eat.

what religion has dictated what you can eat? Are you forbidden from eating bacon?

I'm outraged that religion may be used as a tool to garner new business.

Is your outrage reserved for religious food niches, or does ethnic food niches piss you off too? Are you also outraged by vegan restaurants because you are "forbidden" to eat bacon there too?

I'm especially outraged when animal welfare takes a back seat to religious custom.

Which is not applicable in this case, so why the outrage here?

 

[Deepak]

to appease moslems is selling halal meat and not labelling it as such.

Why would Muslims count it as 'appeasement' if the meat is secretly halal? If they have that much power to force stores to go halal, then wouldn't they want the infidels to know how much power the Muslims have?
That'd be like a terrorist attack where you make it look like an airplane had structure failure, then don't take any credit for the crash....
What's the point?

But then where are secret muslims supposed to shop?

 

[Keith&Co.]

to appease moslems is selling halal meat and not labelling it as such.

Why would Muslims count it as 'appeasement' if the meat is secretly halal? If they have that much power to force stores to go halal, then wouldn't they want the infidels to know how much power the Muslims have?
That'd be like a terrorist attack where you make it look like an airplane had structure failure, then don't take any credit for the crash....
What's the point?

But then where are secret muslims supposed to shop?

In the Kosher delis, i would guess.

 

[The Paul]

I'm "outraged" when religion starts to dictate what I can and can't eat.

No, I don't think you are. You've been provided with examples of religions trying to dictate what you can and can't eat, and didn't really seem to respond to or recognize the stimulus at all.

I'm especially outraged when animal welfare takes a back seat to religious custom.

As I said before, I'd expect you to respond to the poor treatment of animals more strongly than weird fictional scenarios about the poor treatment of animals if that were the case, and you don't seem to be doing so, so it's not really possible for me to believe this claim.

I'm outraged that religion may be used as a tool to garner new business.

Another unconvincing claim. We're having this conversation via the internet. The internet is awash in people trying to marry religion and business. You don't mention it.

It seems like you're just naming things your audience would be likely to think are good justifications for outrage rather than simply saying why you're outraged.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

It seems like you're just naming things your audience would be likely to think are good justifications for outrage rather than simply saying why you're outraged.

Does it really matter? If he is making arguments that will make sense to people, why does it matter if he actually believes them himself? Why does the source of the argument matter? To say that it does would be Adhom fallacy, no?

The "religion dictating what I may eat" bit is rubbish. You can eat at another restaurant. Subway has no ethical or legal obligation to cater itself to any particular market.

I would be upset if the animal cruelty thing is true. I don't know if it is. Does Subway not stun before slaughter? If they don't, that would be a great add for their competitor. "We Kill Our Meat Humanely".

 

[Bronzeage]

It seems like you're just naming things your audience would be likely to think are good justifications for outrage rather than simply saying why you're outraged.

Does it really matter? If he is making arguments that will make sense to people, why does it matter if he actually believes them himself? Why does the source of the argument matter? To say that it does would be Adhom fallacy, no?

The "religion dictating what I may eat" bit is rubbish. You can eat at another restaurant. Subway has no ethical or legal obligation to cater itself to any particular market.

I would be upset if the animal cruelty thing is true. I don't know if it is. Does Subway not stun before slaughter? If they don't, that would be a great add for their competitor. "We Kill Our Meat Humanely".

The thing about animal cruelty is the weirdest part of the controversy. Some people think it is cruel to kill an animal by cutting its throat, which brings unconsciousness in a few seconds, but leaves the heart beating, which facilitates draining the body of blood. Now it gets really weird. These people believe it is more humane to hammer the animal on the skull and then cut its throat. The throat cutters insist the animal must be "conscious" when the throat is cut, or it doesn't count.

Level of weirdness three: Those who want to cut throats and be done with it say, it's okay to hammer them on the head, but if you do and then don't cut the throat, the animal has to be able to shake it off and be okay.

 

[The Paul]

Does it really matter? If he is making arguments that will make sense to people, why does it matter if he actually believes them himself? Why does the source of the argument matter?

Uh... because...

The "religion dictating what I may eat" bit is rubbish. You can eat at another restaurant. Subway has no ethical or legal obligation to cater itself to any particular market.

I would be upset if the animal cruelty thing is true. I don't know if it is. Does Subway not stun before slaughter? If they don't, that would be a great add for their competitor. "We Kill Our Meat Humanely".

Was this just a stream of consciousness thing where you just happened to quote me but it wasn't really directed at me?

 

[nogods4me]

I'm outraged that religion may be used as a tool to garner new business.

SO then Christmas sales, Easter sales, Halloween sales all outrage you?

 

[angelo]

All, and I mean ALL religious practices should never be tolerated anywhere in the world. To do so invites the extremists to sooner or later demand more and more relaxing of the norms. For a Subway or any other to try capture a certain segment of the market is understandable.

 

[Jokodo]

All, and I mean ALL religious practices should never be tolerated anywhere in the world. To do so invites the extremists to sooner or later demand more and more relaxing of the norms. For a Subway or any other to try capture a certain segment of the market is understandable.

There was a direct question: Are you outraged at Christmas/Easter sales?

Select one:

Yes
No

 

[Keith&Co.]

All, and I mean ALL religious practices should never be tolerated anywhere in the world. To do so invites the extremists to sooner or later demand more and more relaxing of the norms.

Angelo, no norms are relaxed by Subway going halal. Extremists don't have SOME relaxing to use to demand MORE.

 

[angelo]

All, and I mean ALL religious practices should never be tolerated anywhere in the world. To do so invites the extremists to sooner or later demand more and more relaxing of the norms. For a Subway or any other to try capture a certain segment of the market is understandable.

There was a direct question: Are you outraged at Christmas/Easter sales?

Select one:

Yes
No

I couldn't give two f...s to be honest. The cynic in me treats them like I would treat the word of a politician. I completely ignore the fanfare, and if something I want is advertised at a super duper xmas or easter sale then I will buy it.

 

[Jokodo]

All, and I mean ALL religious practices should never be tolerated anywhere in the world. To do so invites the extremists to sooner or later demand more and more relaxing of the norms. For a Subway or any other to try capture a certain segment of the market is understandable.

There was a direct question: Are you outraged at Christmas/Easter sales?

Select one:

Yes
No

I couldn't give two f...s to be honest. The cynic in me treats them like I would treat the word of a politician. I completely ignore the fanfare, and if something I want is advertised at a super duper xmas or easter sale then I will buy it.

Just a few posts ago, you stated that you're "outraged that religion may be used as a tool to garner new business".

Now, when presented with examples of Christianity being used as a tool to garner business, you explicitly say you "couldn't give two f...s".

This is a direct contradiction.

In other words, you're bloody inconsistent.

 

[angelo]

No not really. I hate all religions equally. Perhaps extremist islam a little more than equally because in the last few decades it has caused many more deaths and injury than what xtianity has in the same period of time. Or it could be because of the way the extremists see women as little more than sex slaves, and that their prophet whom they defend with such violence was a paedophile, or, many other reasons.

 

[Keith&Co.]

No not really. I hate all religions equally.

Except for the ones you couldn't give a fuck about. So, yeah, 'really.'

 

[Sabine Grant]

All, and I mean ALL religious practices should never be tolerated anywhere in the world.

Which directly implies that any Constitution protecting religious freedoms ought to be either modified to eliminate such protection or religious persons being stripped of Constitutional Identity and subsequent benefiting of Rights and Privileges such Constitutional Identity confers. As I am contemplating the diversity of religions in the US alone which certainly includes both Abrahamic and non Abrahamic ones, we are looking at millions of US citizens falling under your wishful thinking.

To do so invites the extremists to sooner or later demand more and more relaxing of the norms.

It appears that your "norms" rely on suppressing religious freedom either by a zero tolerance policy implying modifications of who benefits of Constitutional Identity or worldwide discriminatory acts targeting any person of religious faith or adept of any religion. I find it ironic that every so often people who adopt such thinking end up displaying the traits of a radical and extremist mentality.

For a Subway or any other to try capture a certain segment of the market is understandable.

And in the specific case presented in the OP, the "certain segment" concerns Muslims who can now benefit from 200 out of over 1700 Subway locations dispersed in the UK and Ireland having "captured a certain segment of the market" by serving only halal products.

As mentioned earlier, the above was made into a storm in a cup of tea.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

No not really. I hate all religions equally.

Except for the ones you couldn't give a fuck about. So, yeah, 'really.'

It is an odd use of the word equally.

 

[Keith&Co.]

No not really. I hate all religions equally.

Except for the ones you couldn't give a fuck about. So, yeah, 'really.'

It is an odd use of the word equally.

What's odder is the next sentence. 'A little more than equally.'
I always thought 'equal' was a binary condition. They're equal or they're not.
There are qualifiers, of course. Nearly equal, far from equal, apparently equal... But "more than equally" seems contradictory in context. Esp. singling one religion out of the rest to claim a less-equal disdain for that single faith, by how disequal the hate runs...