Canteen Menu Avoids Scrutiny

Hi Gemma and Matthew. We aren’t quite sure why you need to attack a public school because of your own problems of racism and bigotry. Schools have an obligation to provide food to all of its students. If there are Muslim children at the school, the canteen is not doing other students a disservice by providing food for them. They are children, not terrorists. Sure, they’ve had no say as to what religion they must be a part of, but neither have kids from other religions.

Did the meat pies go to a vote? Did the frozen yoghurt go to a vote? Did the garlic bread go to a vote?

Then Anoop jumps on the hatred-for-halal bandwagon without full understanding. Does anyone else see the irony of meat eaters discussing the inhumanity in killing animals a different way to how the animals they eat are killed?


For food to be halal, it should either not be outright haram or it should not have additives that are haram. Sometimes “gelatine” is added to processed yogurt. While yogurt itself is perfectly halal, “gelatine” may make it haram, when we know that “gelatine” is made from pork and other animal leftovers.
Although, all foods are halal in all five general food groups, animal meat is a special case. Meat is generically halal meaning that the consumption of meat is not absolutely prohibited, but it needs to fulfil two simple criteria to be consumable by Muslims.
Firstly, the meat of all animals may be eaten with the exception of “… dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that on which any other name has been invoked besides that of God. But if one is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits, then he is guiltless. For God is Oft-forgiving Most Merciful.” (Qur’an, 2:173). Notice the remark at the end of this verse that in times of necessity or when there is nothing else to eat to survive, the forbidden meat mentioned in the verse can be consumed. This is called the “principle of necessity” in Islamic Law and extends to all prohibitions. A prohibition is temporarily lifted at times of crisis and survival is at stake.
The second criterion is the way in which an animal’s life ends, which has to be in accordance with Islamic regulations. Life is a sacred blessing of God to creation, animals as well as humans. If the life of an animal has to be ended for survival, then its life should only be taken in the name of God. Hence, the phrase bismillah (in the name of God) must be uttered just before slaughtering an animal. Only a Muslim or a monotheistic person such as a Christian or a Jew can fulfil this criterion. Muslims, therefore, can eat the meat slaughtered according to Christian and Jewish religious guidelines. Muslims cannot consume the meat of animals that are sacrificed in the name of any deity or idol.
When animals are slaughtered for the purpose of food, all blood has to come out of the body. This is achieved by an incision to the jugular vein of the animal. The Prophet Muhammad also advised that the task is to be completed with one incision while the eyes of the animal are covered so that it does not see the instrument. An animal should not be slaughtered in front of another to prevent unnecessary stress. Some people allege this is inhumane and causes a lot of pain to the animal. They give as evidence the body of the animal convulsing vigorously after the cut. In reality though, as proved by Professor Schultz of Hanover University in Germany, the Islamic way of slaughtering an animal gives no pain while the alternative method of Captive Bolt Stunning (CBS) is quite painful. He did this in an experiment, where the sensations of the brain activity of animals were measured and compared by EEG.
The first three seconds from the time of Islamic slaughter as recorded on the EEG did not show any change from the graph before the slaughter, thus indicating the animal did not feel any pain during or immediately after the incision. The EEG recorded a condition of deep sleep or unconsciousness caused by large quantity of blood gushing out from the body. After 6 seconds, the EEG recorded zero, showing no feeling of pain at all, even though the heart was still beating and the body convulsing vigorously (a reflex action of the spinal cord), driving maximum blood from the body, resulting in hygienic meat for the consumer. Whereas with CBS the animals were apparently unconscious soon after stunning, the EEG showed severe pain immediately after stunning. The heart of the stunned animal stopped beating, resulting in the retention of more blood in the meat, rendering it unhygienic for the consumer. It is for these reasons that Muslims establish halal labelled butcher shops in order to make hygienic and religiously pure meat available to Muslims.

71 thoughts on “Canteen Menu Avoids Scrutiny

  1. “Does anyone else see the irony of meat eaters discussing the inhumanity in killing animals a different way to how the animals they eat are killed?”

    I do.

    • No. I am fine with eating an animal that has been knocked on the head, but wouldn’t want my cow tortured to death.

      • See, that’s where perceptions differ. According to scientific studies, a cow that receives a terminal bolt to the head suffers three seconds of immense pain, whereas a cow that is stunned and then has its jugular vein cut does not feel as much pain but then goes into brief shock before passing out from blood loss. If you’ve ever fainted from having a blood test, it would be along the same lines, only somewhat worse.

        But who are we to play the moral crusaders on the right/wrong way to kill a living thing? Would you like it if I went around to your mother’s house and asked how you would like her killed? This is just an example and I sincerely apologise if your mother is no longer alive. At the end of the day, the animal is killed, and unnecessarily, as vegans have proven for a long time that it is more than possible to live without meat.

      • Eh. Just don’t eat meat.

        The neat thing is, Vegan is almost always halal, hindu friendly, and I *think* kosher, since most food preparation rules in the religious traditions are about meat.

      • Ha, I didn’t mean tortured to death as in “halal”, i meant ummm senseless torture like in the bullfighting, or having sticks poked into their eyes or something like that. I’d be fine eating halal, in fact King Johns on King Street Melbourne is halal and has an awesome burger.

  2. Someone who has worked in an abbatoir said that in keeping with Australian law the animal is stunned first then slaughtered according to halal practice. The same process occurs with kosher meat.

    But then the truth never gets in the way of a good ole bash by bigots.

  3. Maybe Catholic and Christian Australian’s wouldn’t want themselves or their children eating food that has been prayed on in the name of a different religion.

    • Since when are Catholics not Christian? As a papist and a germ freak myself, I wouldn’t want anyone praying on my food tyvm!

      • It would seem profoundly ignorant to be offended by a jewish or muslim person blessing your food. You have to remember that jewish . muslim and christians all believe in the same “old testamant” god. Muslims even believe in Jesus (although they contest the notion that he’s the ONLY son of god, rather they would suggest that we are all sons and daughters of god, at least metaphorically. They DO believe him to be the messiah, and the second most important prophet, however). And interestingly muslims and catholics do share a high regard to Mary, the muslims and catholics both believing her to be a spiritually pure person who had a miraculous birth.

        Also, note that muslims do not prey to any intercessors, be it mary or jesus , so there are no ‘false’ gods invoked here (Remember Allah is just the arabic word for “God”. Arabic christians also call him Allah) , and finally both Islamic and Jewish diet laws are more or less the old testamant dietary laws, (which is why many, perhaps most, muslims consider Kosher to be Halal, since it is old testamant prepared food blessed by a holy man(in this case a jewish holy man).

        So with no theological reasons to be averse to it, it only really leaves religious rivalry, which I’d argue is biggoted.

        Athiests , btw, have no compelling reason to be averse to Halal or Kosher, since the prayer part is meaningless to them, and the important part is the food.

        Even Hindus will be unlikely to find problems with it, since their religion is generally able to take into account “foreign” gods, as with most Australian indigenous folks who can account for it as “jerusalem and mecca dreaming” (At least thats what Nyungah folk tell me).

        Finally, its worth noting that the Halal and Kosher food is not for the christian/atheist/whatever food, its for the muslim and jewish kids. Theres no reason to consult with any parents other than the muslim or jewish kids, because it simply doesnt affect them or their children. You’d certainly hate for an atheist to object to christian children being given hot cross buns on good friday, simply because its none of the atheists business.

        Folks just need to chill.

      • @theantibogan.

        You’re going to have to learn to read the posts people are responding to mate. matthew is the one who brought up praying on people’s food – I don’t want anyone standing there, holding their germy hands above my food, talking over it so that little bits of spit fly everywhere… it’s not a religion thing, it’s a germ thing.

        • Is that all halal is? Meat that’s been ‘prayed’ over? You’ve got no idea. If that’s all that constituted halal food, wouldn’t you think there would be some Muslims who, like you, didn’t like spit on their food?
          Good one.

      • Did I say that I think that halal just means meat that has been prayed over? Well? Perhaps it’s you that has no idea. It’s your blog, but try reading before typing.

        • No but you implied that the spit spray was your objection to it.
          And if that is the only objection you have, are you suggesting that Muslims are so primal that they don’t worry if spit touches the meat during preparation?

      • I did more than imply that I objected to spit spray (i.e. germs). I think I made my objection clear…but perhaps not!

        I believe that I said “it’s not a religion thing, it’s a germ thing” and you then brought up halal food. So, on what basis am I suggesting Muslims don’t worry if spit touches their food?

        Off topic, slightly, what really freaks me out is everyone in my papist church drinking wine from the same cup. It may (theoretically) be the blood of christ*, but yuck.

        *and drinking blood…double yuck.

        • Potentially, all food can be touched by these germs that you’re referring to. I apologise, but I thought you first brought up the germ issue because you said Muslims were praying over halal food. Didn’t you?

      • Not me. It might have been don oorst, but as a member of the generation that can’t read anything longer than a few lines, I didn’t read his diatribe.

  4. What about food made by atheists? If a Christian wants to be that picky about what they eat they might as well starve. I as an atheist don’t give a f**k if food is Halal for Kosher or whatever, it is just as edible.

    • I love how you can misconstrue everything I say. I am an atheist yet I respect religious people who do not use religion as an excuse for hate. My wording does not imply contempt for Christians in the least, neither does the wording of the other comments.

      I repeat: IF a Christian (I use this example because this is the particular context of this discussion, I could easily say Muslim or Jew or Buddhist or Atheist or anything) chooses to be that picky about what they eat, they might as well starve. Preparing food in these different fashions does NOT make it poisonous, so you should NOT have a problem eating it.

      Please try not to assume or misinterpret people in future, it might land you in hot water.

  5. i’ve made a post twice here but it kept getting deleted. This debate will be pretty one sided if my posts keep getting deleted.Also, your last statement is true for yourself and this website. You are making assumptions about Aussie ‘bogans’ throughout Australia through people venting anger over facebook.
    Also, it isn’t about the physical food itself, it’s the fact that the food was blessed in a tradition to keep another religious group happy. Would the Islamic community show the same courtesy to Christians?

    • No posts have been deleted. I’m the only admin in Australia at the moment and I only just got home. The time is 9:27pm.

      At some stage, you will need to acknowledge that your opinion of what constitutes a bogan differs from ours. When you recognise this, you may realise that it is not a bad thing to attack bogans. If you need further clarification (again) as to what qualities we regard bogans to possess, feel free to email us at aardaction@gmail.com .

  6. Well Christians do not require their food be prepared in any particular way. However, I personally know several Muslims who get along very well with my Christian friends. They respect each others customs and beliefs, they discuss religion and have a lot in common in their theological opinions.

    I still see a lot of your posts here, as far as I know the admins have only ever had to edit 2 people’s posts, simply because they were being overtly racist and lacked diplomacy. You are making good arguments and are not here just to stir the pot, so I hope your posts aren’t getting deleted.

  7. It must have been posted on a different topic maybe. Anyway, you do bring up a good point. I have friends from many different religions who aren’t at each others necks. Unfortunately, they aren’t the ones who make these decisions. At the end of the day, in an example such as this, someone is going to be pissed off. If Halal meat was to be sold at a canteen, the Christian community would be pissed off, Australians who might’ve been affected by the Iraq war would be pissed off, any women who have been affected by Mulsim’s mistreatment of them would be pissed off. Not because of its physical preference but because of what it signifies and represents. However, if Halal meat wasn’t to be sold at a canteen, Muslim community would cry racism, a website such as this would cry racism (not as in complain cry, more of a judgement cry). Neither side will be the bigger side and back down because nobody wants to admit they are wrong.

    • Halal food is served at thousands of school canteens around Australia. Christian communities are generally not pissed off at all. In fact, the only people pissed off about it are the kind of people showcased here at theantibogan. People with children who have access to education and healthy canteen food, and who aren’t affected whatsoever by the fact that canteens are helping Muslim children integrate into the Australian way of life by providing food that adheres to their cultural standards and is accepted in kids’ social circles.

    • @Mathew, what a puzzling response. Why would christians object to the sale of Halal for muslim children?

      Surely those christians would have at least once been appraised of the tale of the good samaritan and be aware that their religion prohibits them from making guests from other cultures unwelcome?

      And what on earth have Iraq vets got to do with anything? The war there, *SUPPOSEDLY* had nothing to do with islam. It was a war to depose a secular government (The bathists considered themselves atheists, as was common with 50s era socialist movements) and any GOOD soldier knows his primary task is to protect the local population. The soldiers I know came back raving about the hospitality and friendliness of the Iraqis, generally a fairly moderate bunch religiously, regardless of a few nuts who use their religion as bad pretext.

      Did the Balkan war mean we should ban catering to christians? What about vietnam and the buddhists?

      And for your information, any women who have been abused by muslims (Remember the rate of domestic abuse is slightly lower in the muslim community than the general community according to crime statistics) would generally ALSO be muslims, so they would not exactly be taking your side on this.

      Ignorance is embarassing my friend.

      • you don’t even know if there are muslim kids at that school you are just assuming there are. And if there are some muslim kids there you don’t even know how many. And i mentioned the war vets and the others because they went to war in a country mainly populated by muslims. So if a war vet’s kid went to this school and wasn’t happy that halal meat was being sold there, would that make him racist? i’m not sure you guys seem good at picking it though. And good at adding one last insulting sentence to every response. Through all the comments i’ve made here, i have barely made any insults yet nearly every response to me has included an insult.

        • Pardon the insulting one liners to finish, Matthew. It’s just your arguments seem tiresome.

          A canteen at a school with no Muslim students has little to no reason to serve halal. The school quoted in the post had no canteen menu information on its website, but for the bogan to complain about it, there must be some Muslim population.

          If a war vet’s son is attending a school with Muslim children, wouldn’t this be more offensive than just the food they have access to? If a war vet cares so much about what other options are on the menu at his son’s school canteen, it’s time to move schools. All children are given equal opportunities at school, or at least they are supposed to. And having access to healthy school lunches is part of this.

  8. Umm … why has no-one really mentioned Kosher here? We cater for Kosher, Halal, Vegan and Vegetarians amongst other things. Go to an Eastern Suburbs school and nearly all of them – especially the upper Eastern Suburbs schools – have Kosher everything.

    Most canteens don’t have products which actively contain nuts because of the anaphylactic reaction some children have to them.

    I’m sure if Christians did have specific dietary requirements – there are lots of Christians who are vegetarians – that they’d be catered for, too. *Sigh*

  9. So do you guys think just because Christianity and Islam have some things in common everyone is just going to hold hands and dance around together? There is centuries of bad blood between them your words on a wordpress blog aren’t going to stop that.

  10. No one here thinks that matthew, you are a tool for suggesting we do.

    I have not read one post from you expressing a reasonable point of view from you, nor a post that is based on what is actually being said.

  11. I personally don’t give a shit who prays to what over my food, as long as it doesn’t involve the unnecessary use and abuse of animals.

    And more to the point, I’d never know anyway. Nobody would. It’s not like doing something cruel to another living thing and then thanking the animal/deity magically transfers positive vibes that cancels out culpability.

    It’s all rotten and barbaric. But people can justify anything, can’t they?

    • I’m curious here (as an omnivore that loves this barbarism you speak of) why do vegans value the life of, say, a cow over a plant?

      • Dumb question, but easily answered. Basically (and I’d go so far as to say obviously) a tomato plant will keep growing tomatoes when the fruit is picked. It’s not like you just chop a cow’s leg off and it grows back.

        Personally I value my Veganism to cut out the unnecessary middle man (animal) suffering, to be healthier and have more energy than 100% of omnivores I know, and especially for environmental reasons.

        Also, it’s cheap. And I smell better than everyone I know.

      • Thanks for the cute reply.

        Would it be fair to suggest that a cow reproducing before being slaughtered (for our scrumptious dinner) is analogous to your example of the tomatoes? Essentially, a new cow grows in its place, not dissimilar to your example of a tomato regrowing.

        Re: Suffering. There’s been studies shown that plants “feel” pain; that is, they respond under stressful stimuli. They don’t quite fit with the human definition of the word “pain”, but to completely disregard (or rather, define ‘pain’ away from justification) seems a little narrow-minded.

        The last two are “well, I like it”, and that’s fair! I like non-meat products too!

    • I kind of feel that people eating meat isn’t any different from predators eating prey in the wild. However as humans I also think it’s important to make sure that animals aren’t unnecessarily abused in the process. That is why I eat Halal. That is why I have my own chickens so that I KNOW my eggs are free range, and I know what they’re being fed.

      • I kind of feel that predators eating meat in the wild are carnivores who do not enslave, torture or forcibly impregnate their prey. They also do not pollute the world as they kill and feed.

        Humans, who are omnivores/herbivores, do all these things and more.

  12. No worries mate. But, no, your suggestion isn’t fair. Compare these examples (this is how I see it):

    I keep a woman in slavery, forcibly impregnate her, and then kill her just after she had given birth, thereby cutting her miserable life unnaturally short. From this, the baby is born into the same cycle. I only do this to eat the woman’s flesh, which may last me a week. On a large scale, it causes land, sea and air pollution.

    Or:

    The woman sheds hair and skin cells naturally. I eat the discarded (and renewable) off-casts. This is a continual process. Pollution is virtually non-existent, and in many cases reversed.

    The nervous systems of those in the animal kingdom are as sophisticated as our own. Members of the plant kingdom do not have these complex systems.

    Yet even if they did, I reiterate my earlier point – cut out the middle man. All omnivores/herbivores need to eat plants. They do not need to eat flesh. By eating the flesh of an omnivore/herbivore, you are eating secondary plant matter. It is energetically easier, nutritionally healthier, economically wiser and more environmentally sound to eat plant matter in its primary state.

    • Fair enough, I can certainly see the picture you’re trying to draw there.

      My main problem with your sentiment is the “barbaric” nature that we omnivores have. I take issue with it because there’s nothing *more* pleasant (or comparatively less barbaric) about killing (or damaging) a plant. I understand that there are fruitivores (or something along those lines) that only eat the naturally discarded produce from the plants – and I’m sure they’re more than happy to take the moral high-ground there, rightfully so.

      Plant neuroscience is a fairly young industry, and they do indeed have a nervous system; the fact that it’s not as complex as ours is hardly relevant to the discussion. I guess this (notion of barbarianism) falls to a semantic argument on how you define “pain”, which ironically your definition seems to be fairly anthropocentric. So I ask: do you eat (or deem barbaric to eat) insects, worms, mollusks? On a larger scale, it’s possible that decapods (lobster, anyone? Prawns, etc.) also fall into this category, although one or two studies show an aversion to pain. Any objections to those?

      • theantibogan:

        That isn’t implied in my post at all. Rather, I’m merely highlighting the inconsistencies with: “you’re oh so barbaric for putting an animal through pain”. Stomp the grass and climb trees, but don’t be a hypocrite about it!

        • “…why do vegans value the life of, say, a cow over a plant?”

          “Would it be fair to suggest that a cow reproducing before being slaughtered (for our scrumptious dinner) is analogous to your example of the tomatoes? Essentially, a new cow grows in its place, not dissimilar to your example of a tomato regrowing.”

          The two are dissimilar as proven by the retort provided by VKLBSEFPM…:

          “I keep a woman in slavery, forcibly impregnate her, and then kill her just after she had given birth, thereby cutting her miserable life unnaturally short. From this, the baby is born into the same cycle. I only do this to eat the woman’s flesh, which may last me a week. On a large scale, it causes land, sea and air pollution.

          Or:

          The woman sheds hair and skin cells naturally. I eat the discarded (and renewable) off-casts. This is a continual process. Pollution is virtually non-existent, and in many cases reversed.

          The nervous systems of those in the animal kingdom are as sophisticated as our own. Members of the plant kingdom do not have these complex systems.

          Yet even if they did, I reiterate my earlier point – cut out the middle man. All omnivores/herbivores need to eat plants. They do not need to eat flesh. By eating the flesh of an omnivore/herbivore, you are eating secondary plant matter. It is energetically easier, nutritionally healthier, economically wiser and more environmentally sound to eat plant matter in its primary state.”

      • I am a Vegan = I am a herbivore = I do not eat animal products = I do not eat insects, worms, mollusks, lobsters, prawns, etc.

        Wild stock is being depleted at an alarming rate. If they were farmed, they would be the opposite of clean, renewable resources. And some of them are being farmed.

        I have no objections to your points other than what I’ve already written. I believe I have a fairly good understanding of pain; hence the reasons I am a Vegan. You say that my definition seems to be fairly anthropocentric? Funny that. You’re the one who eats other animals.

        Pain. Inevitable in life, perhaps for all living creatures. But, as with diet/lifestyle and as with politics (which are one and the same thing for me), we must choose between the lesser of two evils.

        I vote with my dollar, the only way that counts anymore. I vote for sustainability; for clean air, sea and land; for freedom from slavery for all creatures great or small; and for the best preventative/curative medicine known to science.

      • Okay JP. You’re right. I’m wrong. I’m going to go and get sick and obese and wasteful and cruel now, all on the strength of that argument.

        End of Veganism. Beginning of hypocrisy-free lifestyle.

        Now, to really get into this, I’m going to go and eat some children. It’s all about constistancy.

      • If I haven’t already spelled it out, I fully accept your notion of being a vegan for environmental reasons (I’m well aware of the efficiency of plants, being a biologist).

        I was merely asking if you OBJECT to eating those particular animals that are currently not thought of to experience pain? Again, in the anthropocentric sense that you define pain by.

        There are indeed benefits to eating as a vega, and I accept those. As I said, the only hypocrisy in your argument (and I’ve seen it tacked on a little tangentially in a couple of your posts, I believe) is the barbarianism you suggest.

        • The beginnings of this discussion are rooted in the minds of those that get fired up with halal food but find it completely acceptable to breed animals and keep them in shocking conditions before killing them and eating them.

      • Yes, I object. For all of the aforementioned reasons.

        Barbarism? There are some great documentaries as well as footage of abattoirs, factory farms and the like out there. Check ’em out.

        In return, maybe you could suggest some barbaric footage of plant abuse I could watch?

        Then, maybe we can compare notes on which was gorier. If you get my meaning.

      • theantibogan: Thanks, I have already conceded that which makes perfect sense from his perspective. That neither contributes to the conversation nor is pertinent anymore. The paragraphs that don’t make any sense from a scientific perspective have already been refuted. You’re welcome to research them yourself.

        I certainly understand where you’re coming from, but I see little difference between killing one organism over another. You’re merely desensitized to one in your youth.

  13. PS: Don’t mind this, I’m just tacking on some self-explanatory, witty stabs at barbaric humans. Vis-a-vis: go and work in an abattoir. Then come and talk to me about how my hypocrisy is the main point here.

      • You’ve got a scientific background, we get it. And you’re looking into (as such) early research suggesting that plants nerve systems are closely related to animals and humans.
        But you don’t see a big difference between cutting the leg off a cow and cutting the branch off a tree?

        Plants grow new limbs. Flowers can live for several weeks when uprooted and placed into water. This is slightly different from capabilities of animals and humans…

        Before you respond – I’m going to admit that I personally know a lot less than you in this field, but you’re going to have to humour me here.

      • Oh, you got me. I can’t resist replying!

        So, once more, my definition of barbarism does not just relate to the pain inflicted on animals (or plants). It also refers to the way humans treat the rest of the world (animal, vegetable and mineral) in the entire process of using and abusing animals.

        Your pain theorem is interesting, and if I had time, I would take that degree. I am open to new knowledge. But I need to work, because a gal’s* got to eat.

        *I am a woman by the way.

      • That’s fair, and I’m not trying to project my way of life on you (I personally don’t care if you eat meat, vegies or even dirt), but I personally do find it slightly annoying/condescending to be called inhumane for (and you won’t agree with this) doing what’s natural.

        I’m glad you’re open to knowledge, as am I, and your responses have actually made more sense than I’ve seen from others (and no, I can safely say I’ve ever discussed the issue with anyone) on random forums. I’ve always linked the notion of barbarianism purely with the pain aspect, rather than the unpleasantness (does that work?) of the act. I mean, I don’t like the idea of a lobster being cooked alive either.

        theantibogan: I can definitely see the contrast between picking a fruit and lobbing the leg off a cow. I hope you can see that it’s not quite the literal perspective that I was suggesting. If we want to keep it analogous, however, to merely the notion of regrowth, is there any objection to starfish? Any number of lizards that can regenerate limbs? Salamanders? When/if we harness the ability of limb regeneration and had the capacity to use it on livestock, would you view lobbing a limb off a cow for food on par then?

        I hope we eventually see more studies done in both plants and invertebrate neuroscience alike (and in fact, I’m sure we will given the advocacy groups around) to provide more conclusive evidence, so we can diverge from the typical/anthropocentric view of “pain” or “suffering” that is currently widely accepted by both parties. But alas, until that time comes, we won’t have anything more definitive to work with.

      • JP:

        Fair enough. But I personally find it annoying to be called hypocritical when all I’m trying to do is live the most compassionate life I can.

        In the words of the great Ian McKaye:

        “At least I’m fucking trying! What the fuck have you done?”

  14. Ah, stuff it. I’ve had my fill. Time to do some real work.

    Thanks for the food for thought JP.

    (I’m not really a smart arse, just passionate. And extremely witty.)

  15. FYI: Anoop Ghale IS vegan, but perhaps not always the strictest one, and a known Islamophobe and racist who is banned from most national animal rights events in the UK. Most vegans and animal rights activists realise humans are animals too. Anoop does not, and even sees fit to celebrate the Pakistan floods. She’s sick, twisted and manipulative, with limitless hatred for Muslims and all who oppose racism. Steer clear.

What do YOU think about this?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s