THE HALAL CONTROVERSY

Andrew Rosindell MP,secretary of the Associate Parliamentary Group for Animal Welfare, recently said:
"I don't object to people of different religious groups being catered for but it's not something that should be imposed on everybody else. The vast majority of people in this country would not want meat of this origin. The outlets have a duty to let their customers know because some will object very strongly, not least because of the animal welfare implications of halal."
(Quoted in a report in the Daily Mail, 19 September 2010.)

In August 2010 Harrow Council in North-West London introduced halal-only menus at its 52 state primary schools.[2] The Arabic word halal means "permitted", and halal food is anything that Islamic sharia law allows to be eaten. Harrow Council argued that dietitians had recommended the policy owing to the difficulties of storing and preparing two sorts of meat, one for the Muslim children and one for all the others. The Muslim population in Harrow is not very large: according to the 2001 census only 7 per cent is Muslim, and the Christian and Hindu populations are both larger. But the dietary principles of this small religious group are now to influence the diet of primary-school children of all faiths and none, and without the consent of their parents.

This incident is one of many that have raised the issue of the appropriate place of halal food and other products in Western societies, and in the UK in particular. Its increasingly widespread use by retail outlets and restaurants, often without the approval or even the knowledge of customers, has caused widespread disquiet. Consumers are being denied the possibility of choice because they are not given the necessary information to make a decision. The practice of slaughtering animals by halal methods has also been called into question on ethical grounds.

So there are four principal reasons why many Christians and others are concerned about the increased presence of halal products:

• The denial of choice to consumers, unless food is labelled and alternatives provided

and following from this:

• The commitment of many Muslims to Islamic mission (da‘wa) and the Islamisation of their non-Muslim host societies, which includes the imposition of Islamic practices on non-Muslims, and of which halal food is a major instrument
• the cruelty to animals allegedly involved in halal-compliant methods of slaughter
• For Christians in particular, the Biblical teaching on the eating of foods associated with non-Christian religious practice and its spiritual and social effects within the Christian community

(The above report on this sensitive issue is from the Barnabas Fund.)

The crux of the matter for Christians in particular, is that there has been a primarily secretive approach to the question of imposing the consumption of halal meat on people which has become more common knowledge only as a result of the matter being exposed by a few individuals whose comments have been picked up by some of the Press.

However the issue is far wider than just halal food, for it is just one part of the sharia system of law which permits certain things whilst forbidding others, and in fact relates not just to food but to the whole of life under sharia law. 

Interestingly, the Qu'ran does not forbid the consumption of food which has been prepared in a manner other than halal. In other words, food prepared by those of other faiths is not forbidden. Hence, there is absolutely no need for the imposition of halal prepared foods in general, beyond the homes of Muslims and in exclusively Muslim establishments.

I share the viewpoint that the real issue behind this controversy is far deeper, and involves the aspirations of the Islamic Fundamentalists to establish the UK as an Islamic nation under Sharia law.

In essence, the United Kingdom was founded on Christian principles, and so led to the statement that it is a 'Christian nation', despite the fact that so many of the population do not practise Christianity in the sense of living the faith.

The doors have been opened to welcome into this nation people of all faiths and of none, and various attempts have been made to create a multi-faith society. In allowing the imposition of halal into the system the whole subject of religious freedom comes under threat.

There are many nations which are either exclusively, or almost exclusively, Islamic, and so I suggest that all who wish to live under Islamic Law should emigrate to those nations where they can practise the style of living that such law permits and encourages, irrespective of where the people concerned originate from.

It is high time that both government and people claimed the natural heritage of this nation and reacted positively towards the attempts by politico/religious groups, organisations and individuals to impose unwelcome change upon it.