Hindus forced to eat Beef in Pakistan Refugee Camps

[Kilgore Trout]

They didn't make their children go hungry. Read the article.

Nah, not really interested. Besides, this particular circumstance doesn't nullify the validity of my statement.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Why are luxury foods like meat being offered at all for emergency relief? I would expect inexpensive, non-perishable, concentrated, easily transported staples.

"Let them eat rice."

I find it odd also. They have a standard mix of beans, rice, and other stuff. Could you imagine if they feed the victims of Hurricane Katrina Guinea Pig from Peru or Pork to Jews. I am sure many others would be up in arms over it. Still I hope the people see it as a mistake and just get over it. They have much bigger things to worry about.

 

[Madhuri]

Besides, this particular circumstance doesn't nullify the validity of my statement.

Perhaps only makes it irrelevant.

 

[Riverwolf]

Nah, not really interested. Besides, this particular circumstance doesn't nullify the validity of my statement.

Your statement was valid; however, it was irrelevant, and therefore pointless to the topic at hand.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Your statement was valid; however, it was irrelevant, and therefore pointless to the topic at hand.

And yet my post was far more relevant than yours. Interesting.

 

[Riverwolf]

And yet my post was far more relevant than yours. Interesting.

Indeed. lol But I do not say "touche."

But, getting back on topic, what do you think of the incident now that you have the knowledge that no mother let her child starve in this case?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Indeed. lol But I do not say "touche."

But, getting back on topic, what do you think of the incident now that you have the knowledge that no mother let her child starve in this case?

My original comment is still what I think, as the situation itself is so unworthy of comment, that a general comment on the silliness of religious dietary restrictions, at least, broaches an interesting related hypothetical. Hence, the relevance of my original post to the thread.

But, far be it from me to question the conversation police of RF whose powers of judging relevance are obviously far beyond my own.

 

[Riverwolf]

My original comment is still what I think, as the situation itself is so unworthy of comment, that a general comment on the silliness of religious dietary restrictions, at least, broaches an interesting related hypothetical. Hence, the relevance of my original post to the thread.

I still fail to see the relevance, as your original comment has nothing to do with this incident, which is the topic of the thread.

But, far be it from me to question the conversation police of RF whose powers of judging relevance are obviously far beyond my own.

Uh... okay.

 

[Madhuri]

But, far be it from me to question the conversation police of RF whose powers of judging relevance are obviously far beyond my own.

There's no need to get upset. I am simply pointing out to you that your comment was irrelevant as this thread has nothing to do with people starving themselves and their children because of religious dietary recommendations. If you want to stick with your comment, then perhaps you can provide us with examples where this has or does happen. Otherwise your comment is simply random and possible completely false.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I still fail to see the relevance, as your original comment has nothing to do with this incident, which is the topic of the thread.

However, silly religious dietary restrictions are a core aspect of the discussion, hence the relevance. Your failure to see it is as relevant is certainly valid for you, yet hardly requires a comment - particularly, if you're so concerned with posts that are on topic.

Uh... okay.

I'll be looking forward to you and the other RF conversation police pointing out the dozens of posts each day that are far more off-topic than my post in this thread. Assuming, of course, that the lack of relevance is the reason for your response. Personally, I often find when people point out posts being irrelevant, it indicates nothing of the sort. When people truly find a comment irrelevant, they tend to simply ignore it.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

There's no need to get upset. I am simply pointing out to you that your comment was irrelevant as this thread has nothing to do with people starving themselves and their children because of religious dietary recommendations. If you want to stick with your comment, then perhaps you can provide us with examples where this has or does happen. Otherwise your comment is simply random and possible completely false.

I apologize for the misunderstanding - there's nothing you could do which would upset me. However, I do look forward to your further policing of RF threads for irrelevant posts. You've got a big job ahead of you.

 

[Revoltingest]

At least no one was forced to eat tofu.

 

[ZooGirl02]

You know, on the one hand I think it is sad that they were offered no other choice of meat. But, on the other hand, in an emergency situation, you eat what is available. I mean, I am a Catholic and if I ever had to eat meat on Ash Wednesday or one of the Fridays of Lent for some emergency reason, I'd do it. I do not think that God would judge me for doing it if it was for some emergency reason.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

You know, on the one hand I think it is sad that they were offered no other choice of meat. But, on the other hand, in an emergency situation, you eat what is available. I mean, I am a Catholic and if I ever had to eat meat on Ash Wednesday or one of the Fridays of Lent for some emergency reason, I'd do it. I do not think that God would judge me for doing it if it was for some emergency reason.

What about Jews and pork? Or an American being feed dogs. You must remember Hindu's are a persecuted minority in Pakistan. In the early 1970s a million Hindu men, women, and children were murdered in East Pakistan (Bangladesh) by government forces (with American support). There is much bad blood between these two groups. And beef is just a small part of it.

http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/

 

[DeitySlayer]

Perhaps it's fitting that Muslims be forced to eat pork and drink beer when they live in non-Muslim countries? It's only fair.

Rather a juvenile response, don't you think? To quote the old maxim, two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[Madhuri]

What about Jews and pork? Or an American being feed dogs. You must remember Hindu's are a persecuted minority in Pakistan. In the early 1970s a million Hindu men, women, and children were murdered in East Pakistan (Bangladesh) by government forces (with American support). There is much bad blood between these two groups. And beef is just a small part of it.

Bangladesh Genocide Archive

A very good point.

 

[beenie]

What about Jews and pork? Or an American being feed dogs. You must remember Hindu's are a persecuted minority in Pakistan. In the early 1970s a million Hindu men, women, and children were murdered in East Pakistan (Bangladesh) by government forces (with American support). There is much bad blood between these two groups. And beef is just a small part of it.

http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/

A very good point.

a very sad point too. i wish these two parties would just get over it. i know, easier said than done, but it really is sad.

 

[ghassan_mattar]

They are being kind when they are offering food first of all even if the food goes against their dietary restriction as long as the food is edible. What is more worse is to deliberately deny any food whatsoever at all.

If it is being done out of genuine ignorance and those who are being offered to such and such food that violates their religious dietary restriction - in this case beef - decline politely telling them why so and as a result this is being taken into consideration and changed in accordance to it - in this case providing food that do not include beef - then certainly those who offered such foods were not doing so to taunt them deliberately but rather instead it is an act of charity, a gesture of kindness.

Offering someone something to eat without knowing that they are generally forbidden to eat such food (foods that are to be avoided only unless when they have absolutely no other choice, that is to say there is no other food) rather than to let them starve is in no way a deliberate act of cruelty but rather that done out of compassion.

An unjustified criticism is a concealed act of hatred.

In this case not self-hatred but self-imposed slander under disguise

I smell a troll.

Why else would you quote the article leaving this out?

Following the protest, officials of the minority affairs ministry of Sindh province rushed to the camp and intervened to resolve the issue.

"It was a misunderstanding. The food was for the residents of the camp but the authorities were not aware of their faith. However, we have made arrangements and they will now be given rations so they can cook their own food," said Dara Kazi, personal assistant to provincial minority affairs minister Mohan Mal Kohistani. PTI

Therefore making Muslims appear innocent. Thats the intention here.

I smell a non-Hindu troll.

Any Hindu will know that this issue is due to misunderstanding therefore problem solved. Hindus arent like Muslims.

He - the user who originally posted the article - is doing this deliberately to detract legitimate criticism of Islam.

Pathetic.

Just goes to show what Islam truly stands for - against freedom of speech.

We dont need to resort to slander but constructive criticism.

I doubt this article is true in the first place. Most so-called Indian news agencies are anti-Hindu. The Hindus would have asked for other foods available at first. Only if they knew that those 'authorities' who offered those food were doing it deliberately, providing them beef when they could have otherwise, would they have protested.

They must have felt that Indian Relief Money to Pakistan which rightfully should have been used to serve them were instead used to convert them. That's why they must have protested. Hindus generally are a peaceful lot.

You don't see Hindus tearing MacDonalds down in the West over cheeseburgers, do you?

Oh but of course MacDonalds would be halal.

Sensitivity seems to be only for those who demand it.

 

[Father Heathen]

Beggars shouldn't be choosers. When it comes to survival, silly superstitions and nonsensical restrictions should be tossed out the window.

 

[croak]

Therefore making Muslims appear innocent. Thats the intention here.

I smell a non-Hindu troll.

Any Hindu will know that this issue is due to misunderstanding therefore problem solved. Hindus arent like Muslims.

He - the user who originally posted the article - is doing this deliberately to detract legitimate criticism of Islam.

Pathetic.

You mean all those threads started blaming Muslims for something or other were really a cover? Really? I thought the person who started this thread genuinely believed exactly as you do.

Yeah, I think I'll stick with my old opinion.