Eater Sundae   12 #1081 Posted January 19, 2015 That why our schools shouldnt be a business. It wasnt when we were kids, and we all ate the same stuff. No complaints back then.  When I was at school in the 60s and 70s, there was always a special dish for those unable to each the single choice main dish. It always seemed to be cheese pie (flan). I don't think there were any vegetarians, but there were a few Jewish kids. There were no muslim kids (as far as I'm aware) at that time at my schools, certainly not in my year. A few 11 year olds had started by the time I was in the 6th form, but I don't recall any changes to school meals, so presumably they sere stuck with the cheese pie option.  My daughter's school now provides a bigger choice than I had at school, but there is not a meat based halal option, as far as I'm aware. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
cuttsie   1,091 #1082 Posted January 19, 2015 When I was at school in the 60s and 70s, there was always a special dish for those unable to each the single choice main dish. It always seemed to be cheese pie (flan). I don't think there were any vegetarians, but there were a few Jewish kids. There were no muslim kids (as far as I'm aware) at that time at my schools, certainly not in my year. A few 11 year olds had started by the time I was in the 6th form, but I don't recall any changes to school meals, so presumably they sere stuck with the cheese pie option. My daughter's school now provides a bigger choice than I had at school, but there is not a meat based halal option, as far as I'm aware.  If kids went to a school within walking distance and mothers stayed at home to look after them as happened in the 60's, 70's and 80's there then they could go home for dinner and eat whatever they want. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Eater Sundae   12 #1083 Posted January 19, 2015 If kids went to a school within walking distance and mothers stayed at home to look after them as happened in the 60's, 70's and 80's there then they could go home for dinner and eat whatever they want.  That's true. At my infants school, that would have been the case. Less so in the case of my secondary school (Grammar School at the time) as kids came from all over Sheffield Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Penistone999 Â Â 10 #1084 Posted January 19, 2015 There's a massive difference. You know for a fact that the tooth far is not real. No one can actually say, with conviction, that they know the answer to life and death. Â No difference at all , both figments of peoples imagination , both fictional , both fake . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Solomon1   10 #1085 Posted January 19, 2015 Just in case you missed it, here's Russell Brand's take on this story. True news  Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
roosterboost   10 #1086 Posted January 19, 2015 No it does not, nor should it. You've got it arse about tit. Society should make reasonable allowances to take account of people's religious beliefs.  Our faith requires my kids to be fed on caviar laced with gold flakes and to drink nothing but Perrier water. My school won't provide it. What are you going to do about that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Zamo   10 #1087 Posted January 19, 2015 Just in case you missed it, here's Russell Brand's take on this story. True news   He gets some things right. The 'war on terror' has, and continues, to make the terrorist problem worse and we should stop interfering in the Muslim world. The other things he gets right is that violent terrorism is worse in Muslim countries.  What he ignores is that shooting and bombing people in Muslim countries drives the people being attacked to fight back and into the arms of extremists who provide the means. But that doesn't explain why Muslims raised in the West (and all who have resorted to terrorism have been raised in the West) attack a society that does not attack them and kill their children... it offers them support, security and prosperity whilst educating their children. Their rage is an excuse and it is for the intolerance of Islamic ideology.  He also fails to acknowledge that whilst interventions and invasions in the Muslim world have made things worse, you cannot exasperate something if it doesn't already exists. Islamic extremism has been exasperated by our response to it but the root cause is Islam/Islamic culture. Which obviously explains why Islamic extremism and terrorism is so much worse in Muslim countries.  What he finally gets wrong is his solution. Love is not a solution. 'Loving life more than they love death' is nothing more than the sort of rhetoric he hates when it comes from the gobs of the politicians he despises! It will not prevent extremists from either side (Muslims terrorists and then those who will initiate a backlash against them) from dragging the rest of us into a conflict. The only thing that will prevent conflict is for the attacks by Muslims to cease and that requires Muslims living in the West to moderate further and rein in the religion induced rage pushing so many down the extremist path. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
tinfoilhat   11 #1088 Posted January 19, 2015 He gets some things right. The 'war on terror' has, and continues, to make the terrorist problem worse and we should stop interfering in the Muslim world. The other things he gets right is that violent terrorism is worse in Muslim countries. What he ignores is that shooting and bombing people in Muslim countries drives the people being attacked to fight back and into the arms of extremists who provide the means. But that doesn't explain why Muslims raised in the West (and all who have resorted to terrorism have been raised in the West) attack a society that does not attack them and kill their children... it offers them support, security and prosperity whilst educating their children. Their rage is an excuse and it is for the intolerance of Islamic ideology.  He also fails to acknowledge that whilst interventions and invasions in the Muslim world have made things worse, you cannot exasperate something if it doesn't already exists. Islamic extremism has been exasperated by our response to it but the root cause is Islam/Islamic culture. Which obviously explains why Islamic extremism and terrorism is so much worse in Muslim countries.  What he finally gets wrong is his solution. Love is not a solution. 'Loving life more than they love death' is nothing more than the sort of rhetoric he hates when it comes from the gobs of the politicians he despises! It will not prevent extremists from either side (Muslims terrorists and then those who will initiate a backlash against them) from dragging the rest of us into a conflict. The only thing that will prevent conflict is for the attacks by Muslims to cease and that requires Muslims living in the West to moderate further and rein in the religion induced rage pushing so many down the extremist path.  Are we going to see Russell fly out to Iraq and try and hug it out with some ISIS fighters? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Zamo   10 #1089 Posted January 19, 2015 Are we going to see Russell fly out to Iraq and try and hug it out with some ISIS fighters?  I think Muslims would see that as a cruel escalation of Western hostility and I'd have to agree. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ab6262 Â Â 202 #1090 Posted January 19, 2015 No it does not, nor should it. You've got it arse about tit. Society should make reasonable allowances to take account of people's religious beliefs. Â what a stupid statement:roll: why should society make allowances?? everyone should make their own allowances for their own various foibles or dietary requirements religious or not:roll: Â ---------- Post added 19-01-2015 at 17:21 ---------- Â I think Muslims would see that as a cruel escalation of Western hostility and I'd have to agree. Â we would be hauled before a Nuremberg type trial for an escalation like that:hihi: sometimes you go too far Zamo;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Bonzo77 Â Â 13 #1091 Posted January 19, 2015 No difference at all , both figments of peoples imagination , both fictional , both fake . Â You know for a FACT, that the tooth fairy is fake. You don't know for certain that there's no object that could be classed as a god. You might have made up your mind, like I have. But neither of us know for certain. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Obelix   11 #1092 Posted January 19, 2015 You know for a FACT, that the tooth fairy is fake. You don't know for certain that there's no object that could be classed as a god. You might have made up your mind, like I have. But neither of us know for certain.  You really think there is a difference between the tooth fairy and God?  That's like saying that because a puddle and an swimming pool are so different in size, you can't be sure that one of them contains any water... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...